Template talk:Move

I liked the old version more. Less obnoxiously in-your-face. Specifically: I strongly prefer the prior color for the box - to me, red indicates either something critical or an error, neither of which really applies here. Also, the prior version was shorter (stole less of the screen space). The icon that was added is an okay addition, but seems too big for this purpose. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:22, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Chime in at Guild Wars Wiki talk:Formatting#Maintenance templates :) - anja (contribs) 19:24, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Add reason field?

Any objections to adding a second variable/argument to this template? Currently, it works with {{move|target}}. I would like to propose modifying this to work with {{move|target|reason/justification}}. If the second variable is left off, it displays the same as current - if the second variable is added, then an extra line shows on the tag that shows the reason given for the move request. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 00:19, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

done :) poke | talk 00:47, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Needing admin attention

Would it be possible to add an extra category to this template for when the move needs admin attention? (When the target page already exists.) I think it would be nice to have it automated, instead of users having to post on the noticeboard or wait for an admin to notice it on the deletion list. - anja 12:47, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Possible: yes. But, are you sure it'd help? I mean, if they are not looking at speady deletes, would they be looking on another similar list, whit much fewer cases? Backsword 02:59, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, of course I think it would help. The move category is a bit hidden, but that can work since few moves are in need of urgent attention and anyone can move. By having a new list, with just a few items, that all the admins are aware of, it is more likely that we'll take a look and help where needed. We don't need to sort through all the other move candidates to get to them. What tells you we are not looking at speedy deletes? Those are usually the ones I check first.. - anja 07:29, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

What about adding a new speedy case for it instead? like "G8: Target page for a page with consensus to move." (reformulate it please :P) poke | talk 13:20, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, the point is admins don't need to delete the page, it is done through moving, automatically. So it just creates that extra step I don't want to take :P Else I would just go for "G4: Housekeeping". - anja 14:06, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

What about adding a parameter that if used adds it to a new section on the List of candidates for deletion, maybe above the Candidates for deletion since it would generally be small and call it "Candidates for moving". Might still need a new category to make it work with dpl; not entirely sure; but it would be more noticeable and separate. --Kakarot 14:18, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

"admins don't need to delete the page, it is done through moving, automatically" - then I fail to understand what this is about :/ poke | talk 14:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Pages can only be moved over an already existing page if that page is only a redirect. Pages that have been changed since the move cannot be the target location of another move.

I dunno what Anja is talking about either :P -Auron 14:27, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Ehm?! Try to move a page to just about any other existing page. You get a notification that page already exists, and check a box that says "Yes, delete the page". "Deleted to make way for move" is an autmatically generated text. Have you NEVER done that? Or am I stupid now?
Poke:This is to create a list with those moves that actually need admin attention (target exists and is not a redirect) separate from the move category. To make it more visible to admins, and have fewer steps for everyone. Instead of move-tagging>delete-tagging>deleting>moving you get: move-tagging>moving, done.- anja 14:40, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

You can do that because you're a sysop. Most people can't. They get a message saying that a page by that name already exists and thus the page couldn't be moved. -Auron 14:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

YES I KNOW >< The point is to create a quicklist so sysops can do the quick move for the "normal users". I must be getting really confusing if you can't make that out from what I've already said :( - anja 14:48, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Imo, as there is always time needed for getting consensus for the move I don't see a need to have a quick option to have an admin move it. A simple deletion tag on the target should be enough. Also if we can keep the articles to be moved category empty, there is no problem to regularily check the category if there is need for an admin. poke | talk 14:54, 3 August 2008 (UTC)